Parliament gives net-zero 2050 target green light

The House of Commons has backed raising the UK’s 2050 decarbonisation target to ‘net zero’.

However, Labour has already said that the act could be amended further to bring the target even closer, if scientific advancements over the next few years make that feasible.

In a debate yesterday evening, MPs approved a motion to introduce the new target through an amendment to the 2008 Climate Change Act.

The legislation, which was introduced under the last Labour government, set a target that the UK should reduce its carbon emissions to 80% of 1990 levels by 2050.

But under the change voted through last night, the UK’s statutory goal will be raised to net zero by the middle of the century.

This means that any residual emissions by that date must be counterbalanced by measures such as tree planting and CCUS (carbon capture, use and storage) to take out carbon out of the atmosphere.

Opening the hour and a half long debate on approving the motion, interim energy and climate change minister Chris Skidmore said the new target is needed in order to comply with last year’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s recommendation designed to prevent temperatures rising 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.

He said that by keeping global warming below this level it might be possible to mitigate some impacts on health, livelihoods, food security, water supply, human security and economic growth.

“We can make history again as the first major economy in the world to commit to ending our contribution to global warming forever.”

The 2050 net zero target is in line with the advice of the Committee on Climate Change which was published last month.

Dr Alan Whitehead, shadow spokesman for energy, said Labour “strongly” supports raising the UK’s statutory emissions reduction target.

But the UK should go further by attempting to hit the target before the middle of the century, he said: “It may well be that further scientific advances indicate that we need to achieve the target before then. I think that that will be the case and the Act could be amended further, if necessary, to take that into account.”